A lot of tech writers have been pointing to Flurry’s report on the “weak” sales of the Google Nexus One, saying that the phone is a failure because it didn’t sell as well as the iPhone, Droid, and MyTouch. That’s such an amazingly stupid comparison for several reasons.
First of all, the Nexus One is being sold by a company that’s new to consumer electronics. Secondly, the company is only selling the phone online. A newcomer that doesn’t have the advantage of physical stores? Of course the Nexus One wasn’t going to do iPhone numbers. Only a moron would have expected competitive sales figures.
More to the point, the Nexus One is a hero product that highlights the features of Android 2.1 and launched Google.com/phone. It’s not about a single product. It’s about the OS and an attempt to change the way consumers by mobile phones. It’s amazing that so many writers are being so shortsighted. The best they can come up with is “it didn’t sell as well as iPhone ergo fail!!!” That’s such a lazy and thoughtless conclusion.
It’s disappointing that so many tech writers went with the easy, knee-jerk reaction to Flurry’s findings. Too many of them are obsessed with mythical “iPhone killers” that they can’t see the bigger and/or more interesting picture.
The Iphone is the market leader so therefore trying to at least mimic the success the device is understandable. I don't see how comparing two keyboardless, 3G devices isn't fair. It being compared to the 3GS is a bit skewed but not that much. Comparing it to the first gen Iphone would be better…but I think comparing it to the 3G is the best way to go.
If it is just sales that are being compared, then it is quite fair to say and point out how pitiful the Nexus One has done. I think it is amazing that the world's advertising leader can't even buy some TV time and market the device. That is very damning.
The Iphone changed the market as well. It also sold a boat load. Had the Nexus One been priced differently, used more than the smallest wireless 3G provider for 3G, and not have so many damn fees attached to it (simply because it is T-Mobile) then it might do better. Maybe some tv commercials wouldn't hurt it either.
@Smartguy Saying that the sales are "pitiful" is also a poor conclusion. What other phone on that list was only sold over the Internet? How is that a fair comparison?
Furthermore, Google isn't trying to outsell the iPhone with the Nexus One. So why even make that comparison? It's stupid. The point was setting up the online store and showing off Android 2.1.
Lastly, how is the iPhone the market leader?
@Ray
Iphone is the market leader in intanigble goodwill. The name is synonymous in a multimedia smartphone that only has a touchscreen. I think the Nexus One falls into that category. I never said it is the best device or the best value for the money. Apple did one hell of a job marketing the device. Google should have paid attention.
How are the 20k sales not pitiful when compared to the success of other similar devices? You pigeonholing the fact that the Nexus One is only sold online doesn't matter. That is a conscious decision by Google and HTC which could have easily changed and sold in a brick and mortar store. Technically you reach more potential customers through an online store.
The better argument actually is the fact that the device is on T-Mobile and not selling well. I know it will run on ATT but why would you bring a smartphone to ATT that only ran on EDGE? The chart you have in the article shows both T-Mobile exclusive phones selling not so well compared to the other competition. Trying to spin the real numbers by saying Google is just introducing/showing off is a bad conclusion. Especially when your software says version 2.1 .
What about the fees I mentioned? Do you think that has something to do with it? If you can only buy the phone online then those people quite possibly have looked into them. Who wants to pay 180 for the phone…then pay an ETF to T-Mobile and then pay another 100 or so back to Google or HTC on top of it?
This device was hyped up (probably not by Google) and really came out with a resounding thud. The unlocked device can only use 1 or the $30 3G networks. Not really that price shakeup/market changer that people we interested in.
correction: $200 ETF
$350 Google recovery fee
That's more than if you were to buy the device outright. That's ridiculous.
@Smartguy Market share and mind share are two different things.
Pointing out that it's sold online absolutely matters. Look at the MyTouch as an example. When it was released, it was just another Android phone and it was also sold on T-Mobile. It had the advantage of brick-and-mortar stores, so it sold well, despite it being underpowered. It's delusional to think "online only" wasn't a factor.
Again, you're fixated on this single product when it clearly isn't what Google cares about. The Nexus One was used to launch the online store and show off the new features of 2.1. Do you not know what a hero product is?
Saying my conclusion is bad shows poor analysis on your part. Google did not position this phone as an iPhone competitor similar to how Verizon did with the Droid. This is not about a single product. That seems pretty clear if you give it some thought.
As for the ETFs, there's no arguing that they're a poor deal. I don't see the point of buying subsidized anyway. It's more useful and has more resale value if you buy it unsubsidized.
It isn't just the ETF. It's the damn cost recovery fee on top of the ETF you pay Tmobile in addition to the initial 180 you "paid" for the device. Comes out over 700.
The online store for Android does not matter. The software is open source. Nobody in their right mind is going to pay for an app. Debuting their store could have been done cheaper and easier. In fact, they didn't have to release their own device to do it. You really think Apple only cares about the Iphone? NO. They were selling Iphone O/S, expanding Itunes, and showing off an App store once the 3G came along.
Ray, it does not matter what Googles intentions are long run for iterations of Android 3.0 and above. They aren't selling the device that has it. How can you attempt to grab marketshare if you can't get any? Being sold online only is not a good excuse. I'm rational, I know you won't sell as many if people can't put their hands on them, but there limits to the handicap it offers. A combo of too many fees, no recognition, overhyped, BAD support and a notable 3G issue (the firmware) are what is holding this device back.
Yes I know what a hero product is. I think the 1st gen Iphone (which sold 270k in first 30 hours) was the better hero device and debut.
side note: I bet this device flies off of the shelves when it is sold on Verizon.
side note extra: A prepaid Google smartphone might have been the best route.
@Smartguy You're confused about what store I'm talking about. It has nothing to do with apps. Again, you're missing the point. Google.com/phone will eventually have multiple devices from all the major carriers. You think this doesn't matter? That's highly debatable.
@ the subject at hand
I'm a Machead (I confess)… have been since before the iPhone ever even came out.
That said, I had to physically hold one in my hands and mess with it before I was sold on it. Even then, it was the 3G that made me say "Screw this phone I have now, I need the iPhone".
All that said, the online only thing is definitely something to consider. Sure, pics words, and videos can tell you alot… but there's still the "test drive" factor that the Nexus One just aint got.
@Ray
If there isn't a place for someone to hold and play with an expensive device they will use everyday, then yes, it will fail.
Perhaps that is why Apple didn't just rely on its few brick and mortar stores and sold the device through ATT as well. There are other factors in there, but the Iphone wouldn't sell nearly as much without people being able to touch them.
I did misunderstand you on the store front you mentioned. The fact they needed a new device to show off Android 2.1 is highly debatable.
@Smartguy I don't understand your last point. You say that brick-and-mortar stores matter, but you also think it's fair to compare a phone that sells in physical stores to one that's only sold online?
I think all phones can fairly be compared to the iPhone and what it (unfortunately) has done. It was just another phone when it was released, but because it did well nothing new is allowed to be compared to it?? They are all vying for the same goal. They are all making the same product.
Its not like I could get into the electric car business and say here is my product but to compare it to a Prius would be unfair.
If I were Google and fell on my face the same way this had I would be doing the same move I did as a 10-year-old. Try and fail = "Well that's not what I was going for anyway"
Yes it is fair to compare them. They are in the same market.
@Smartguy Except that they're not exactly, hence the comparison is stupid. You don't compare circulation numbers between magazines that use controlled sales and newsstand sales. They're both magazines, but the sales model is different.
@Ray
they are both sold online. One has the benefit of being sold in a store now. Sounds like good strategy to me.
I dont care that the Nexus One is being sold online only. If Walmart came out with an ereader it of course is compared to the Kindle. The kindle is sold only online. You are trying to put the Nexus one in a niche setting and while yeah it is, it doesn't matter. If the market wants it, it buys it.
I guess it doesn't really matter to me that it hasn't sold well
@Smartguy I don't think you get it at all. It doesn't matter that they're both sold online. What matters is one is only sold online, hence the comparison doesn't work. That's easy to see.
The Kindle example doesn't work either. That's an entirely different market that way underdeveloped compared to mobile phones.
Ultimately, you're missing the point. You're too fixated on the phone itself to see that the phone isn't the point.
@Ray
we are going to have to agree to disagree then. You seem to be missing the point that the phone isn't selling well isn't merely a function of it being sold exclusively online. There are many factors determining why it isn't moving very well. If you want to see the release of it as a good way for them to show they sell phones now then so be it.
The kindle example definitely works. We can go on and on about that.
Ultimately any device regardless of delivery method to an enduser will be benchmarked against established competition. If your logic dictates that the two aren't competing in the cell market then no matter what you try and argue I won't see the logic. The Necus One was the logical next step after acquiring AdMob.
I think you will have a different mindset once it hits Verizon. The phone will be sold in a store as well as online.
You and I would get piss drunk debating over beers.
@Smartguy I'm not missing that point at all. That's the major factor.
The Kindle example is apples and oranges — way different market.
When did I say that they aren't competing? I said comparing the sales figures is stupid because the models they use aren't comparable.
Of course it will sell more on Verizon. That just adds to my point, not yours.
@Ray
I have held off on this for as long as I can. You sound like a google Fanboy. If they only sold 20k units online then I can call that lackluster.
Kindle applies. You have to think 3 dimensionally though. You are taking your theory of the cell phone market and applying it to a whole different market. You have the paperbacks, which are like garbage phones, hardcovers which are nicer and then ereaders. The kindle is without a doubt synonymous with the genre. Naturally anything released subsequent would be benchmarked against it. In my example I said Walmart puts out an ereader. They sell it in the store, but it probably won't sell as well as the Kindle not because of the way it is sold, but all of the supporting factors. The digital store, device support, and build quality. All of those factors come into play when most rational people buy something online. Arguably the kind of consumers who are buying the Nexus One online are definitely doing research and know that support from Google is lacking, there is a 3G issue, the phone has a lot of fees if it doesn't work out, etc. I think you are making a critical error in judgment in proclaiming that the Google online phone store is doing alright. It is one device, and is only offered online. It's sales would be less than 10% of what they are right now if it were actually sold in a store. Conclusion: If the Nexus One is only sold online, then that is where it is. The sales numbers of the device can easily be compared to smartphone competition.
In the end I think the biggest stimulus for the low sales is the fact the device runs on T-Mobile. T-Mobile sales for the MyTouch and Nexus One are pretty low.
Competition comment: Post 12 and 13. If you sell a phone to a consumer market, you are in the same market. That is economics.
@Smartguy Again, I don't think you're paying attention and you're mixing a multitude of issues.
"If they only sold 20k units online then I can call that lackluster."
When did I say otherwise? I didn't state an opinion on the 20,000 one way or another. That wasn't my point and have no idea why you think it was.
"Kindle applies. You are taking your theory of the cell phone market and applying it to a whole different market. "
The Kindle example would have applied if e-readers were successfully sold at traditional retailers for over a decade. The e-reader space is a comparatively new market and the comparison is nonsensical.
"In the end I think the biggest stimulus for the low sales is the fact the device runs on T-Mobile. T-Mobile sales for the MyTouch and Nexus One are pretty low."
Again, this has nothing to do with the main point. If anything, it supports my argument that comparing sales figures for a phone with limited sales reach to a phone with broad sales reach is idiotic. MyTouch compared to iPhone is a far more legitimate comparison because the phones are sold the same way.
"If you sell a phone to a consumer market, you are in the same market. That is economics."
That's oversimplifying. Look at what I said about magazine. Comparing sales figures for two products with completely different sales models is just dumb. That's reality.
You continue to miss the big picture. Not only is comparing the sales figures stupid — it's not the point. Reporters are fixated on the Nexus One as a product because that's the easy thing to do, but it's not the story. Like I said before, Google.com/phone is the real story. It's bold and risky. It could change the way a significant portion of Americans buy phones or it could flop spectacularly.
Lastly, how can you say I'm a Google fanboy when the company pulled my ads, making extremely difficult to maintain this site?
@Ray
sorry dude.
I'm gonna close with this: I'm not over simplyfying the market statement. A market is a market. I have a minor in Econ and had that crammed down my throat.
Come to NOLA. Buy you a beer(s)
@Smartguy Don't be sorry. I apologize if I've come off as short today. I'm just lacking sleep. I enjoy these exchanges and appreciate your numerous contributions to the site.